Unnecessarily Long Renders with GI…

[Brian Jones]

[renderedHero] “300 DPI (i don’t know if this is necessary “

this should only affect print size (and crispness)

Otherwise, for starters put a Compositing Tag on every transparent object (all that glass) and uncheck ‘Seen by GI’

[Brian Smith]

Thanks for getting back to me so soon! I had a look at some of the texture settings. I adjusted the DPI down, but it’s not making that big of a difference. I downloaded the glass material from C4Dtextures.com and it was already set up to not receive GI. I also added the compositing tags. The glass renders fairly fast. After 42 minutes, it’s rendered about 50%. The place it’s getting held-up in is the grass.

Any other ideas maybe?

———-
Brian Smith
http://www.renderedhero.com
PDX, ORYGUN

[Brian Jones]

try turning off ‘Receive GI’ in the Hair material’s Illumination tab

[Brian Smith]

That seemed to do the trick. Thanks again! I got it down to 1 hour and 19 minutes. I actually found a tips and tricks page and there were some other adjustments just like that on it. Have a look if you want.

https://backroom.renderosity.com/~cinema4d/tips.html

Thanks again!
You guys are always a huge help. No matter how stupid the question.

-Brian S

———-
Brian Smith
http://www.renderedhero.com
PDX, ORYGUN

[Adam Trachtenberg]

I’m wondering why you’re using Stochastic mode. It has the advantage of being flicker free, but it’s awfully slow. I would try camera animation mode. You’ll need to up the settings quite a bit to reduce flicker, but it should still be faster than stochastic.

I’d also exclude the plants from GI in addition to excluding the grass.

Avoid using an infinite plane for the floor if possible — it spreads the samples out too much.

Turn on shadow caching in render settings if you’re using soft shadows.

[Eugene Hooper]

correct me if I am wrong but if you’re just rendering for screen resolution shouldn’t the dpi set to 72dpi? Like Brian Jones mentioned, using a high value such as 300dpi would be used for print. Wouldn’t that be where a significant chunk of the render time be wasted?

I would appreciate it also if someone could confirm this, I am quite new to this myself and would like to know.

Thanks in advance 🙂

[Brian Smith]

Well I ended up getting it taken care of. I had to set it to render while I left town for a few days on vacation, but it was done by the time I got back. Simply excluding the grass and plants from the GI seemed to help the most.

I have found that rendering out 72dpi vs 300dpi isn’t that big of a difference. You are correct that it is usually reserved from print. However the work I have done as of late is all for web, and it seems to be faster to render out stills for different elements at 300 dpi at 1920×1080 so we have the maximum scaling possible. Ultimately before it’s put in a site it will be optimized for web through photoshop.

As for the project I was working on at the time of this post, I was still a noob and wanted everything as hi-res as possible. (There was no practical reason for the 300 dpi on this image sequence.)

Don’t know if that helps.

[Eugene Hooper]

oh that’s good to know that the dpi doesn’t have a huge effect on the render time. When I work on future projects I won’t have to be so hesitant about upping the dpi then, it’s nice to know that you can get print quality with no huge sacrifice to render time.

thanks 🙂